I posted these in the "Antagonist Story Goals" thread, but thing they won't be seen and besides, the other players in our game were wondering about these rules as well...

p.37 "Turning Up The Heat" - we are a bit foggy on escalation, in that sometimes we escalated as if the previous intent happened but then you faced an additional difficulty, and sometimes we escalated as if the previous intent just got harder or more serious. Are those both valid approaches to escalation, or is there one correct way to do it?

p.38 "This Result Sucks" - can you risk a link to make the antagonist reroll her conflict, in hopes of a failure? Or does it only apply to Protag success?

1: When you Escalate, you're saying that now this *other* thing is *also* implicated, or maybe somethng *bigger* is implicated. So if you lose, you lose the whole thing.

2: You know, I've been thinking a lot about that. The official answer is that you can only reroll your own failure, but I can't remember why I made the rule that way. So, unofficially, yes, you can. Let me know how it works!

Logged

the glyphpress's games are Shock: Social Science Fiction and Under the Bed.

Yeah, both of these areas were by far the most ambiguous and confusing.

1: So when you get an escalation, you re-roll just your own dice and narrate the scene to somehow show that your goal is a lot more serious than you previous thought, and/or that something much bigger is coming into play? And if you and the Antag both roll your fulcra, then you both escalate and re-roll?

2: So does the Antagonist get to re-choose a praxis and re-roll as well? Do you get to change your die divisions (change what proportion is d4 and what proportion is d10)? And also, realistically, if it's supposed to be a separate conflict that takes place after the previous, then what's the point of doing it at all? Isn't it supposed to save you from failure, like if you're going to be shot in the leg and you lost? If you lose and it takes place afterward how does it help your leg get un-shot? Shouldn't it really just put the conflict on hold and raise the stakes of the pre-existing conflict that you were going to fail?

Yeah, that bit about rolling the d10s of the protag and the d4s of the antag wasn't in it. And my point about the conflict still stands. What if what you're doing is trying to prevent something bad, though not the bad thing the antagonist is doing, that would have an immediate effect and you fail? If you then risk a link, it says in the book that it's a separate event, though time may or may not have passed. I thought when you risked a link you were sort of prolonging the outcome to see what would happen. If it is, then you can't really prevent what happened to you, you're just having more conflict, which you could have anyway by just having more conflict in the story.

Okay, so about spectator dice, I know you can reference any minutia in the pile (right?), but if you're coming up with a new one you can reference something you don't own (right?), but what if the person who does own that issue or shock says that what you're doing is wrong? I get the whole point of the "if someone seconds it" but if that can be anyone, even someone who doesn't own the issue/shock, then what's really the point of owning an issue/shock? Isn't it supposed to grant you some authority over that area that other people can't have?

You know, I've been thinking a lot about that. The official answer is that you can only reroll your own failure, but I can't remember why I made the rule that way. So, unofficially, yes, you can. Let me know how it works!

This came up in a recent game I played! There was a lot of gnashing of teeth regarding the inability to make the Antagonist reroll. You've just made some players very happy!Mel